Normally I wouldn't resort to the childish response, but hey, it seems more than appropriate. I say that until the Chinese government takes their knock-off, piracy, IP-theft seriously, then their companies should be ignored when they make the kinds of complaints that foreign companies have been making for years about China. They can't let their homegrown companies rip everyone else off then suddenly find religion when one of their own companies feels it's IP/trademark/etc is being abused...

Do you know that patents and copyrights are a national thing? Each country has its own patent and trademark office. My company(us) won a patent lawsuit against another US company. That company can not sell such product in US. But that company still sells the product in Japan.

My point is the Chinese legal system has no obligation to voluntarily enforce US patents and trademarks until a US company actively tries to ask Chinese to do.

I think many Chinese companies are employing this loophole. So it is not a corruption of Chinese legal system at all.

If a company were set up making counterfeit iPads (or any other name-brand product) in the USA, all for export, do you really think that US law would allow that?

That seems pretty unlikely to me. ISTM that manufacture of counterfeit goods can be prevented under Chinese law too, and that if they are produced, export can be stopped.

Do you really think otherwise?

There's a difference between counterfeit goods and a trademark dispute.

In this case, Apple clearly has the rights to use the iPad trademark in the rest of the world. If they manufacture in China and ship outside of China, they are not infringing on the Chinese trademark.

Manufacturing counterfeit goods is a different thing, entirely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellacool

You do realize that China is a Communist country and if they choose to stop the exports of ANYTHING they can and no one can do anything about it. Sure they can move manufacturing to other countries but that would take years, would not happen over night. Many here fail to understand that this case isnt "business" oriented, it is "Nationalism" oriented. Here comes the big bad American Apple trying to bully its way around (Like America does) throw money at everything and do what it wants with impunity. Even if Apple is 100% in the rights here, it is perception and "saving face" that is ruling the day on this one. If the Chinese government at all feels Apple is attempting to bully or disrespect them, they will halt shipments immediately, the old fashion "Chinese safety inspection" that lasts for years of cargo ships with Apple products on them.

That is true. However, there are two scenarios:
1. China chooses to follow world trade laws. In that case, Apple has the right to manufacture a product for export that does not have a valid China trademark.
2. China choose to ignore world trade laws and block iPad exports even though world standards would not allow that. In that case, the repercussions would be immense - and Chinese government officials are not stupid. The chances that they would so blatantly violate world trade processes over one little trademark dispute are miniscule.

Quote:

Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz

How do you know that? What is your evidence? Is that anything more than a guess?

Because Apple's not stupid. Do you really think Apple has a contract with Foxconn saying that they'll pay them a billion dollars a month (or whatever it is) whether Foxconn ships anything or not? Not bloody likely.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

Quote:
Originally Posted by parksgm
Justify this - there is no widespread conception that the United States has a corrupt legal system. However, there IS the widespread belief that China's legal system is corrupt. Most of the commenters on the board have tacitly agreed with the underlying assumption that China has a corrupt legal system in their posts.

By and large, there is no large scale bribery of the judicial system in the US.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody

I meant that both countries are corrupt in the sense of being anti-democratic and being ruled by an elite group that the laws don't apply to (among other things).

I think the onus is on you to prove that there is rampant corruption in the Chinese judicial system and that judges are regularly "bought off." Merely saying (paraphrased), "everyone here agrees with me" (about that) is not the same as proving your point. I could easily do the same.

I mostly only wanted to point out that the original statement was (IMO of course), borderline racist and had "a tone" that was hardly different from making jokes about "darkies" or whatever. It came across as a mean spirited dig at an entire culture and race for no reason other than pure nastiness.

I didn't *report* the post as offensive or racist as I know these things can be open to (some) interpretation, but it seemed to me like a pretty disgusting kind of remark to make.

Perceptions can be either racist or just plain ignorant (as in uneducated or uninformed). A true racist is, of course, also uninformed. Throwing accusations of racism could in itself be argued as an act of racism.

Better to assume that a posters comments are uninformed unless blatant racists remarks are made obvious. To educate or attempt to educate and enlighten is far more constructive than name calling.

A racist is not going to change by the fact of his/her nature being pointed out. An uniformed person, on the other hand, more likely has the potential to learn and change.

Just because a breakfast cereal claims that something lowers cholesterol doesn't mean the cereal either has cholesterol lowering capabilities or that it even contains the said thing. Not everybody realises this when such an advert is presented, just as not everybody realises that some widespread conception could be wrong.

We will stop buying American debt and destroy your economy. Don't forget that we have you by the short curlies.

Sincerely.

China

Apple does not have any significant debt. And more than half their profits are generated overseas.

The Chinese have been actually selling off US Treasury notes to diversify their holdings. They still hold quite a large amount of US bonds, but China is more dependent on the US consumer buying their products than we are on the Chinese buying US bonds. The Chinese don't want to destroy the US economy - it will damage their economy more.

Maybe when you get old enough to have some short curlies, you can learn something about economics and business.

There's a high level Chinese delegation visiting Obama today. I wonder if the lower level people on the trip (who do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to substantive talks) are getting a polite earful from their US counterparts about the wisdom of letting a two-bit trademark extortionist hold hostage a US company that is instrumental in providing hundreds of thousands of jobs in China.

So Proview sells the rights to the name, probably thinks that it didn't negotiate for enough money the first time around and now they "refuse to honor" the agreement. China isn't becoming more capitalistic, they're becoming more like organized crime.

You said the magic words there. China has a government on paper, but what runs the country is organized corruption top to bottom! Rule of Law is what you don't get when you move your production to China or Russia.

I suspect Proview wants some extortion money. Then there's the judge and some local officials as well as a few high level officials to pay off... In pre-communist China there was the "Torture of 1000 cuts, now, there is the Torture of 1000 bribes (cuts).

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge

Proview says that the Apple's iPad trademark deal with Proview, Taiwan is not acceptable in China, and thus they want the Chinese government to stop export/import of iPad. However, the Chinese government claims Taiwan to be a part of China. Does anyone see a contradiction here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by parksgm
Justify this - there is no widespread conception that the United States has a corrupt legal system. However, there IS the widespread belief that China's legal system is corrupt. Most of the commenters on the board have tacitly agreed with the underlying assumption that China has a corrupt legal system in their posts.

By and large, there is no large scale bribery of the judicial system in the US.

Perceptions can be either racist or just plain ignorant (as in uneducated or uninformed). A true racist is, of course, also uninformed. Throwing accusations of racism could in itself be argued as an act of racism.

Better to assume that a posters comments are uninformed unless blatant racists remarks are made obvious. To educate or attempt to educate and enlighten is far more constructive than name calling.

A racist is not going to change by the fact of his/her nature being pointed out. An uniformed person, on the other hand, more likely has the potential to learn and change.

Just because a breakfast cereal claims that something lowers cholesterol doesn't mean the cereal either has cholesterol lowering capabilities or that it even contains the said thing. Not everybody realises this when such an advert is presented, just as not everybody realises that some widespread conception could be wrong.

That is true. However, there are two scenarios:
1. China chooses to follow world trade laws. In that case, Apple has the right to manufacture a product for export that does not have a valid China trademark.
2. China choose to ignore world trade laws and block iPad exports even though world standards would not allow that. In that case, the repercussions would be immense - and Chinese government officials are not stupid. The chances that they would so blatantly violate world trade processes over one little trademark dispute are miniscule.

You write those claims as tho there's no question of them being unequivocally true.

IMHO the Chinese could consider those iPads as being manufactured/owned by Foxconn (or whoever) and being sold to Apple under contract and on upon completion, which includes packaging I believe. In which case it's conceivable that the product would be considered sold to Apple rather than being manufactured by Apple. If so, then Foxconn might not be permitted to sell/export them.

You write those claims as tho there's no question of them being unequivocally true.

IMHO the Chinese could consider those iPads as being manufactured/owned by Foxconn (or whoever) and being sold to Apple under contract and on upon completion, which includes packaging I believe. In which case it's conceivable that the product would be considered sold to Apple rather than being manufactured by Apple. If so, then Foxconn might not be permitted to sell/export them.

Just a thought.

Doesn't Apple own the parts already? Either way, the Chinese company and the government are completely in left field on this one so there is no telling what they may do.

No need. Apple pays Foxconn for every unit shipped. If Foxconn can't ship any units, Apple doesn't have to pay. No need for Apple to cancel its contract.

Really? Can Foxconn just keep everything they make? I'm pretty sure they could make a bundle in their black market, especially given China's iPhone/iPad mania now. Apple's customer in the West would get pissed off big time though.

I think that's 8-9 percent of public debt (i,e US treasuries, Mae bonds), plus another trillion in US private/corporate securities/debt. Let's not also forget their 3-trillion dollars FX holding.

That being said, I don't think Proview's lawsuit is going to start a trade/currency war with China. I think Walmart is still the largest importer of Made-In-China goods in US (automobiles from Japan, Germany being the US's #1 import)

Really? Can Foxconn just keep everything they make? I'm pretty sure they could make a bundle in their black market, especially given China's iPhone/iPad mania now. Apple's customer in the West would get pissed off big time though.

No one ever suggested that. Foxconn does not have a license to sell the product and would be guilty of patent and trademark infringement if they did so. (plus, I doubt very much that Apple would have signed a contract without specifically restricting Foxconn's ability to sell to the black market).

The point is that Apple is probably not obligated to pay Foxconn if Foxconn can't ship anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorguy

You write those claims as tho there's no question of them being unequivocally true.

IMHO the Chinese could consider those iPads as being manufactured/owned by Foxconn (or whoever) and being sold to Apple under contract and on upon completion, which includes packaging I believe. In which case it's conceivable that the product would be considered sold to Apple rather than being manufactured by Apple. If so, then Foxconn might not be permitted to sell/export them.

Just a thought.

The Chinese can't consider any such thing unless the contract is set up that way.

Furthermore, even if they are sold to Apple, as long as they're only exported, they do not infringe a Chinese trademark, so the government could not legally stop them.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

No one ever suggested that. Foxconn does not have a license to sell the product and would be guilty of patent and trademark infringement if they did so. (plus, I doubt very much that Apple would have signed a contract without specifically restricting Foxconn's ability to sell to the black market).

The point is that Apple is probably not obligated to pay Foxconn if Foxconn can't ship anything.

The Chinese can't consider any such thing unless the contract is set up that way.

Furthermore, even if they are sold to Apple, as long as they're only exported, they do not infringe a Chinese trademark, so the government could not legally stop them.

You keep working under the assumption that a contract in China is actually worth something. The fact that Proview is not abiding by the original contract should be a hint that law is not going to be a significant factor in this case.

You keep working under the assumption that a contract in China is actually worth something. The fact that Proview is not abiding by the original contract should be a hint that law is not going to be a significant factor in this case.

Precisely what I keep saying. People are thinking logically and like business men, this is outside of that thought pattern.

The point is that Apple is probably not obligated to pay Foxconn if Foxconn can't ship anything.

I find it more probable that Apple IS required to pay if the reason for non-shipment is Apple's fault. No other structure makes sense to me. But we're both just guessing.

Foxconn is totally 100% innocent here, and the courts have already found Apple to have violated applicable laws. IMO, Foxconn should not get screwed over by Apple here. Foxconn did nothing wrong, and Apple lost in court already.

There you go. Can they achieve that? Well ignorants think not. The fact is that it is China that builds any Apple hardware as well as other merchandise. In that economic strangle it is just enough to convience China "rulers" who make anything happen and who run all this show (again ignorants frequenty corporate do not see this).

It is the same case as with oil lines in Europe through neiboring countries... just a little "preassure" with threataning that something would stop for a moment and everybody agrees to anything.

Wrong. China stops buying American debt, then either China must buy some other American asset or product OR see their currency appreciate significantly against the dollar, destroying their export industry.

Also, when you owe the band $1,000 it's your problem. When you owe the bank $1 trillion, it's the bank's problem.

Wrong as well. It'll hurt their export industry but not destroy it. There are plenty of other countries that but from them. China buys a great amount of scrap metal from us. They need us but we also need them.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

There you go. Can they achieve that? Well ignorants think not. The fact is that it is China that builds any Apple hardware as well as other merchandise. In that economic strangle it is just enough to convience China "rulers" who make anything happen and who run all this show (again ignorants frequenty corporate do not see this).

It is the same case as with oil lines in Europe through neiboring countries... just a little "preassure" with threataning that something would stop for a moment and everybody agrees to anything.

Why Apple is hoarding $100B and still refuses to build factories in the US? If iPad is mading the US, problem like this will not occur... Yeah, the price of iPad will increase. But if it's a good gadget, people will shell out the money especially it's made in the U.S.A.

Why Apple is hoarding $100B and still refuses to build factories in the US? If iPad is mading the US, problem like this will not occur... Yeah, the price of iPad will increase. But if it's a good gadget, people will shell out the money especially it's made in the U.S.A.

Why Apple is hoarding $100B and still refuses to build factories in the US? If iPad is mading the US, problem like this will not occur... Yeah, the price of iPad will increase. But if it's a good gadget, people will shell out the money especially it's made in the U.S.A.

They will pay through the nose, but the terms will be confidential and it will not have any severe or far reaching affect on Apple's bottom line.

Apple is gonna get screwed, but it's their own stupid fault. They didn't deal with the company which had the registered trademark in China. Or so says the court. Apple is appealing the decision to the highest court. We'll see what happens in the meantime.